Saturday, March 18, 2006

On the Republic of Silence

I must begin with an apology: in this country I do not have a copy of The Republic of Silence to hand. Therefore I write from memory and since for me the reading of a text is inextricably bound up with who and where I was at the time of reading - there may be less of Sartre here and more of my recollection and interpretation of Sartre than is desirable. Nevertheless.

In a 1944 essay entitled The Republic of Silence Sartre begins: "We were never more free than during the German Occupation." A strange way to begin, no? What does he mean? As everyone knows - and certainly as everyone living in proximity to the particular time and place from whence he wrote - the German Occupation was a time of profound unfreedom.

Everything - the coercive power of the state, its far-reaching institutions, of the military - all authority and law was ranged against Resistance. And yet, he said, "We were never more free."
Under Occupation, Sartre claims, all of our actions become invested with moral significance. Under that overwhelming pressure, beneath that imperial weight, against that empirical measure, all that is trivial is stripped away. We do or we do not.

"Because an all-powerful police tried to force us to hold our tongues" he writes, "every word took on the value of a declaration of principles."

Over and over again under Occupation, one is invited to surrender, to yield up mind and body, to collude in oppression, even to collaborate with one's oppressors in one's own oppression. To connive. To betray. To submit to the conquest of the mind and to do this not once, not twice, but constantly until treachery is the very air we breathe. To accept the oppressor's account of oneself as truth - is that not the very meaning of the colonisation of the mind?

Language mattered. Not for consequential reasons - not because x might lead to y, or because perhaps just perhaps the right words (or the right frame even) might somehow undo Occupation. Language (and not only language) matters because responsibility endures where hope does not. And to my mind it is this - the endurance of responsibility beyond hope - that is the source of the freedom which Sartre speaks of.

Well we are all Occupied now. And beneath this assault there is little enough cause for hope. No knights in shining armour riding to the rescue, no gun-slinging heroes of the wild west, no grand-standing high-minded politicians to lead us to the Promised Land. No justice. Just us.

Outnumbered.

Overwhelmed.

Occupied.

And like as not, whatever we choose will not suffice.


So welcome to your freedom.

It cannot be removed from you: no torture can excise it, no luxury can exorcise it, no justification can excuse it.
It is wholly and irrevocably yours.

What will you do with it?

Sunday, March 12, 2006

Mitigating Circumstances

I'm really not one of the 'lock 'em up and throw away the key' mob. Honestly. I'm far more interested in restorative justice and rehabilitation than revenge.

And I agree wholeheartedly that the prison population here in the 51st State is larger than it should be and that -- by and large -- prisons aren't doing terribly well at the whole rehabilitation business.

But one can think all this and still find ironic the arguments of the Sentencing Guidelines Council (SGC) that sentences for rape and domestic violence should be reduced. It strikes me as particularly dubious that part of the rationale for reducing sentences for rape appears to be to bring them 'into line' with proposals for "other violent crimes like robbery."

Yes, that's right folks. Robbery. Can we say 'Women are not property, so rape is not like robbery' three times fast? It's a bit of a tongue-twister, but I'm sure we'll all get there eventually. Take your time.

And that's not the worst of it.

Courts will be advised to "take into account mitigating circumstances" such as "sexual familiarity" between rapist and victim before the attack. Because everyone knows that if you said 'yes' once, well that holds good forever. And you can't possibly say 'yes' to smooching in the corner at a party without having also consented to -- well, pretty much anything and everything really. Robbery for starters. Oh sorry -- I meant rape. See how easy it is to confuse the two?

The SGC also has domestic violence in its sights. Apparently men convicted of domestic violence "could escape jail terms if they convince the courts they are capable of changing." Can't you just see it? One, two, three, let's all sing together now:

Some people say that I'm a bad guy..
They may be right, they may be right.
But it's not as if I don't try..
I just fuck up, try as I might

But I can change, I can change!
I can learn to keep my promises, I swear it!
I'll open up my heart and I will share it..

I've always felt a guilty sense of affection for that Southpark movie.

By the time men make it to court for domestic violence, they've usually become a pretty dab hand at persuading the person they've been beating that 'they can change.' They have the patter down. So expect an all-singing all-dancing and high-kicking in spangly costumes chorus of this one.

So -- I hear you say to yourself. If this comes in will it mean that mean fewer women will try and bring charges or rape or domestic violence? Yep. That'd be my guess.

The thing that's ironic about it is that the existing prison system doesn't do a great job at rehabilitation: what it does sometimes do is give the victims an opportunity to regroup and (often) relocate. So there is a huge need for rehabilitative work and for restorative justice to ensure that, when perpetrators are released, they are less likely to just go and rape and/or beat again. And, yes, to be effective, much of that work probably does need to take place in open prisons and/or in community settings. Fine.

But surely that can be done without allowing into the sentencing guidelines the dizzying array of self-pitying apologies and excuses that have novelty value in court only because the people there haven't heard it all before?

"I didn't mean to -- I just lost control. I'll never do it again."

Ad infinitum, ad nauseum.

Wednesday, March 08, 2006

We come in peace. Shoot to kill

“We come in peace, shoot to kill, shoot to kill, shoot to kill;
we come in peace, shoot to kill; Scotty, beam me up!”

I hated ‘Star-Trekkin’ Across the Universe.” Thoroughly despised it from the cutesy apostrophe in the song-title to the Klingons on the starboard bow. I’d turn the radio to anything else – even the New Kids on the Block anything, which is pretty much drilling through the bottom of the barrel of the anything barrel, especially when you’re approximately 13 and doing your damndest to avoid anything that even hints at ‘girliness’ – rather than listen to its horribly, bouncy, repetitive, predictable, awfulness.

My, that was a long sentence. I see that the intervening years have not yet lessened the strength of my feelings on this subject. Suffice it to say that I’m not thrilled to have this song running through my head tonight.

But it’s there for a reason.

All of the obvious ones that go without saying.
And another, also obvious, which I’m nonetheless going to say something about.

The Guardian today reported that the Association of Chief Police Officers are defending their 'shoot to kill without warning' policy, the first victim of whom was Jean Charles de Menezes. They don't call it a 'shoot to kill without warning' policy: it has been christened 'shoot to incapacitate.' In the same way that 'civilian casualties' are known as 'collateral damage.'

Only going forward and things are getting worse.

I know people up here in the North who do not go down to London any more.
I'd imagine that makes things difficult for them. Job-related events they don't attend. Friends they don't visit.

But London is a ways off and they'd have to take luggage onto the train.
"Carrying a backpack while an 'Asian' male from the North."

They do the math: x2(suspicious looks) + 4x(trying to look reassuringly instead of angrily at the people giving the suspicious looks) + c(small but not non-existent chance of getting shot) = 0 trips down South.

It's a mix of fear and anger and enough of it has rubbed off that even I, shielded by my female gender and white skin, feel its trace when I venture onto the Underground or into a railway station.

It's not that what happened on July 7 wasn't frightening.
It's that what happened on July 22 was so very much more so.

Monday, March 06, 2006

"Other people decide about it"

This is the story of Innocent Nkung. Unlike one of my earlier experiments, it is not fiction.
I wish it were, though.

For now, Innocent Nkung lives in the next town over from the town where I live now. I've never met him, but have had occasion to learn a little about him. He's a few years older than me, but not many. He and I have two things in common: we are both foreigners and we have both studied philosophy. There, however, the similarities end.

I have other places where -- if push came to shove -- I could live. Other places where my right to work, to be a political creature, to subsist and indeed to do more than that, are acknowledged. And to a considerable extent (certainly far greater than when I lived in the U.S.), I have those same rights here.

Innocent Nkung does not. There is no place in the world where he has these rights -- or rather he has no place in the world where these rights have been respected. He fled to the United Kingdom seeking asylum and the Home Office turned him down: he is at risk of immediate deportation.

A human rights activist in the D.R.C. from 1992 onwards, Innocent Nkung had been arrested many times. The Independent Race and Refugee News Network states that on his most recent arrest in January 2005 he was "given the 'option' of a 15-year jail term or 'volunteering' for Secret Service Training. After he refused to kill others as part of this 'training', he was incarcerated in the notorious Buluwo prison, where he was raped, beaten and tortured. "

He escaped and fled to the United Kingdom in May 2005; his case for asylum was declined in December of the same year. Reading between the lines, it seems that he was turned down because he was unable to prove that he was raped and tortured in prison. Alas, those responsible for his incarceration in the D.R.C. had carelessly failed to supply him with certified copies in triplicate, detailing, for the official record, the treatment he had received at their hands.

Here is what he said about his life two months ago:

"If I call what I and others in the D.R.C. have been through as physical torture, I realise there is another torture in England - a mental one and it is greater than the first one: I can't sleep because there are a lot of thoughts in my head and feelings - nightmares and flashbacks. I am very depressed and unable to do things. I think about my children, parents, brothers and sisters that I didn't see since 1995. My children need to be cared for and I can't do my father's job if I am in jail or dead.

'My life doesn't belong to me anymore and other people decide about it. I don't know what is going to happen in my life, I don't know where I am going to live, I don't know what I am going to eat. Everything is in the Home Office people's hands."

If you wish, you can sign a petition in support of Innocent Nkung's asylum claim.

And perhaps like me, you will also ponder why it is that the U.K. doesn't want this man, who had the unyielding moral integrity to choose imprisonment, torture and rape over becoming a killer, within its borders.

Saturday, March 04, 2006

Volcanic Terrain



Recently I was back in Erewhon for a little while.
Being part of the Ring of Fire, Erewhon specialises in geological excitement. Earthquakes and volcanos come with the territory. And in places the crust of the planet wears thin.

Since I'm currently in 'learning the wonders of modern technology' mode and simultaneously in 'lacking the energy to think seriously' mode, I thought I'd resort to that tried and true standby: 'hey come and look at my holiday photos.'

So without further ado -- this is a huge volcano crater. It's actually in the South Island, out on Banks Penisular, near Akaroa. Unlike the volcanos in the North Island, this one has been dormant for a long, long time. The spiky-looking tree that figures so prominently is called ti kouka or more commonly, 'cabbage tree.' Here's a closer look.



This one's in full flower. Like many things from Erewhon, cabbage trees have emigrated. In particular, cabbage trees grow vigorously in the North of England where they are optimistically called "palms" in order to convey the strong impression that Manchester is in fact a warm and balmy sub-tropical paradise -- any snow that you see on the ground is therefore merely a figment of your imagination.

But for real geological excitement (and for real palms for that matter) you have to head up into the North Island.


Coming from the South, I'd always been under the parochial impression that it had the more spectacular landscape. Yes -- the North had warmer weather and proper cities that are actually inhabited, but the South had Alps, glaciers, Sounds, fjords, plains, psychotic mountain parrots and a whole lot of emptiness.

Parochial impressions are usually mistaken.




This is Waimangu valley ("Wai" means water and "mangu" means black). On June 10th 1886, this whole area was covered in thick ash when Mt. Tarawera ("burnt peak") erupted, burying the village of Te Wairoa and destroying the Pink and White Terraces. Everything that you see here has either grown back or returned since. The valley is of considerable interest to ecologists because it's a rare example of an ecosystem regenerating essentially from scratch.


And one is left in no doubt that further eruptions are a question of 'when' not 'if.'



The mist visible here on the water's surface is not the remnant of an early morning fog: it is steam. Standing on the track above, one could both feel the heat from it and see that, in places, the water was actually boiling.







Further down the track, one crosses boiling streams making their way out to Lake Rotomahana.

The thing I found extraordinary
was the way that the plants grew right down to the water's edge.

Then there are the miniature geysers. All of four inches high, but thoroughly determined. The vivid green of the water is probably the result of mineral salts, but I've not a clue which specific ones they'd be.

Walking through this valley, one can't fail to notice that one is walking atop a thin crust -- like a waterboatman on a still pond. Where the path runs near the stream (or where, at one memorable point, a tiny geyser is forming in the middle of the path itself), one can touch a hand to the ground and observe that it is much warmer to the touch than could be explained merely by the effect of a sunny day.

To be continued.

An experiment

Dear Reader,

Let me tell you a tale. It begins innocently enough. I was stationed in one of those seemingly endless, dull stretches of the early 21st – you know the kind? Nothing much of anything new was happening and too much of everything else. Scouring the bookshops. Forget stolen glimpses at Jane Austen’s notebooks – it’s still the bookshops where all the real work happens. I was in Oldham, one of those small hilly Northern towns that peers so anxiously down into Manchester’s smoggy fastness. It was uncannily like home. In the right light that poisonous fog was not so very dissimilar from the silvery mist in which my home city swathes itself from time to time. And its sunsets. Which is what I mean by innocently enough. Anywhere else, I think my training would have held. In some less familiar or more volatile corner of the world – in D.D.R before the Wall fell, or D.R.C before New Congo rose to greatness – I’d never have done it. Confession? Justification? Hard to tell.

Here’s what happened. The real deal. Straight from the horse’s mouth.

I was walking down Union St. in my ghost-like way, glancing at the real-estate agents. Noting that the property boom hadn’t yet found its way to this pocket of the North. It would, of course – barely two years later, yuppies would be moving into the refurbished mills. Cafes serving exotic and piquant Mediterranean specialities would be springing up like mushrooms. But right then, you could still buy a quasi-semi-detached two-bed terrace in Oldham, with a little front garden and a paved rear yard for £82, 250. No chain. Vacant possession. Ideal for a first-time buyer or young family.

That ad in the window has frozen itself into my memory. If I close my eyes I can still conjure it before me, an ad, in a Ryder & Dutton window on a grey and clammy Oldham day. That last split second of peace before a flash of peacock blue caught my eye.

I turned, caught by that flash of colour. A little girl, maybe five, in a bright shalwar kameez racing out of the estate agents, looking over her shoulder as she tore across the narrow pavement. Straight into a lorry’s path. I didn’t think. I just grabbed her as she went flying by and knocked her down. A blaring of horns and not half a second later, her mother and father were there, terror giving way to frantic relief as they realised their daughter was still alive on the pavement not dead beneath a lorry. The girl began to cry and her mother knelt down to gather her up, hugs interspersed with a fierce scolding. “Nazia Akhtar! Don’t you ever run out into the street like that again! Thank God you tripped. What do they teach you? Always look! Always, always look!” Her Dad standing frozen, ashen grey, like he’d seen a ghost. Which he hadn’t.

I dare say I looked much the same.

Unnoticed, I walked away, turned the corner, and promptly threw up. You’re really not supposed to do that sort of thing, especially in public, but in the broader scheme of things it seemed trivial. No-one saw anyway, I think. And then, filled with a sick horror that no amount of upchucking in the gutter could expurgate, I went home – or rather, back to the ground floor flat, messy and book-lined that marked both my fragile fingerhold on the 21st and my livelihood.

Once inside, I moved with a deliberation that belied sheer panic. Methodically, I washed myself thoroughly until I was clean again. And I prayed. All day. I prayed for forgiveness, for mercy, for a future and the courage to face it. At last I rose, stiff, numb and exhausted.

I set and opened the Gate. And moved through it to find out my fate.

My turn to be frozen with relief. Edward came to greet me “Hello love,” he said, “ I was just taking Fazal to soccer.” He must have seen my face then because he stopped short of kissing me hello. “What’s wrong?” he said, “You look like you’ve been through the wars. Did you finish your shift?”

“No,” I said. “I couldn’t.” I shook my head, trying to clear it of a strange fogginess.

For the first time ever, I’d cut a shift short. That was OK. You’re allowed to pull out early every once in a while – the Authority knows the loneliness of our work and makes allowances. Edward called Emma to ask her if she minded running Fazal to soccer with her two. He sat me down and poured me a glass of iced water. “What happened?” he asked. I’d been looking forward to that posting. “I thought I had made a terrible mistake” I said, “But everything is alright now.”

And indeed the world seemed in all wises and respects the same as it had been when I left for work. He hugged me. “Do you need to report it?” he asked quietly.

“No” I said – “No – it’s OK. I’ll go back in a few days. I just need a rest. I got confused.”

And I did wonder, sitting there, sipping my drink, still stiff, whether I’d imagined it –whether I’d really pulled that girl back from the brink, or just been a ghostly witness to a lucky escape. Could she have tripped at just the right time?

But in my heart, I knew that she had not – my shin was bruised where her sharp little shoes had hit me, and I could remember the feel of her smooth dark hair. But my world was still there, unchanged, unscathed. The next day, once I’d slept, I got on the computer and went looking for Nazia. I wasn’t very hopeful – pre-Conflagration data is so patchy and Akhtar a common name in Oldham at that time, but it was worth a try. And there she was. Nazia Akhtar. Not much, but enough to sketch her life.

The little girl in her peacock blue shalwar kameez had lived in Oldham all her life. She got married just out of school, at seventeen. She went to university in Manchester and completed her degree four years later, having taken a year off to care for her new-born daughter. She became an English teacher at one of the local sixth-form colleges and was a steward for a while in a teacher’s union.

She survived the Conflagration. Her husband and daughter did not. The first Census held after those terrible years listed her as a widow, living alone. She never remarried, but some years later fostered two children – a brother and sister. Orphaned. She died just before her fifty-fourth birthday of a heart condition common among survivors.

There you are. Nazia Akhtar’s life in 150 words. And I must admit that I wondered whether I wouldn’t have preferred to be knocked down by a lorry – to never have lived my life – than to lose Edward and Fazal as she did her husband and child. I’m not sure I did Nazia any favours.

Citing exhaustion, I stayed home a few more days. The bruise on my leg healed. I watched for signs, for hints of the world’s ending. I saw none.

And so, I put it down to ‘one of those things’ and thanking God, I returned to work. Back to my patient dredging of the past. To the careful memorising of forgotten text. I never stopped thinking about it exactly, but I put it from the front of my mind. I did not go looking for Nazia and I did not report it.

It must have been about five years later that I was stationed in London. Tower Hamlets – later, but earlier -- Nazia Akhtar wasn’t born yet. I was stationed that time with a good friend, so life was less lonely than usual. She had bought some wine over. I don’t usually drink much at all, but we were celebrating an exciting find, the rediscovery of a lost book. Tomorrow the serious work of committing it to memory would begin, but for now work could wait.

Both of us drank more than we intended and stayed up later than we intended, high in my bird’s nest of a flat. And when our jubilant conversation grew quieter, Yasmin told me a strange story about the time she once hauled a middle-aged woman out of a swimming pool and gave her mouth-to-mouth until she coughed up the water and breathed again. Her own horrified remembrance. How terrifying it was to open the Gate after that, not knowing what she would find. She wept and not only from the wine. And realised from my face that I was not entirely surprised.

How many such mistakes?

And as late-night confidences yielded to sober discussion, we decided to act. Gradually – as befits the prudence and restraint of a Reader – we began experimenting to see what was and what was not mutable about our past.

Theoretically, of course, we had been taught that ‘what’s done stays done.’ When Gates were first developed innumerable efforts were made. Agents were dispatched to despatch the architects of the Conflagration. To stop the Rwandan genocide. To undo the Holocaust. To unmake all of those sad litanies of atrocity. All failed. The Gate shut down. Agents were lost or arrived thousands of miles and years from their intended destinations. Only once it became clear that the past was a done deal – that our traffic was limited to what a human brain could bring through the Gate – only then did they become the preserve of the Readers.

But now it had turned out to be not so simple after all. For in our slow and tiresome minimalist meddling – which did not run to assassination attempts – we found that we were not quite as ghost-like as we had supposed. Casual interaction had never been a problem: dressed inconspicuously one fades unnoticed from the memory of the busy shop assistant, from the harried bus driver.

Observed, attended, by many eyes we were powerless – that is true. But unobserved, things proved otherwise. “Attention fixes events. Not occurrences,” we concluded. And help is sometimes possible where harm is not.

Our experimental conspiracy has lasted five years of now-time – maybe 10 of lived-time. Fazal is at university now and Edward has some grey in his hair. It makes him look distinguished, I think. The gap in years that was between us when we married is all but gone now and I suspect I shall change my job after a few more stints. I wouldn’t want to overtake him by too much. And the world has not ended in all of this.

But dear Reader, our conspiracy ends now, with these words. This morning as I walked to the market, someone pushed into me and I tripped. I was very lucky – I’d almost stepped out into a bus. Unlike long-lost long-dead Nazia, I have a hunch what hit me and a hint of things to come.

And I mean to tell the world.
For I have seen a future tense and caught a glimpse of the past perfect.

Wednesday, March 01, 2006

Begin from the beginning.

But one never can.
Once upon a time. . .
In the beginning was the. . .
No. I'm just not much good at Gospels. Even John's.
Time to cut my losses, pick an arbitrary starting point and settle for a continuation.

An Arbitrary Starting Point

The detritus of a union meeting. A pile of votes being counted by two foreigners out the back. I was one. An acquaintance, for whom I had considerable respect, but whom I would not then have presumed to call a friend, was the other. He was furious and it seemed to me that desolation was inseparable from that rage.

I said "What can I do?"

It was not a whim but it was unplanned. I had not gone to that meeting with the intention of saying anything of the kind. He would have had every right and more to spit at me, because the offer should have been made months before and it shouldn't have been an offer. We both knew it.

But demonstrating a rare gift for patience in the face of provocation, he refrained. And I became part of a fight that was intense, wonderful, exhausting, enraging, embittering and desolate.

Looking back, I've slowly come to realise that that moment was a central event in my life. Not the central event, any more than there is a beginning. But before that meeting it was still possible to walk away, to continue my long-planned long-range trajectory undeflected. The day after, it was not quite as possible and in those following, it became gradually, inexorably less so. A balance of opposing forces subtly disturbed.

It's one of a very few decisions which I have no need to regret. But it would be deceptive not to acknowledge having become less trusting, more wary, more weary and far less sociable than the person who made that decision.

I'm not sure, however, that this is a bad thing. But I digress.

Let me tell you a little about that respected acquaintance who has long since become a rare friend. We don't speak that often now, living in different countries, but in March he often comes to mind.

He is obstinant, stubborn, fiercely confrontational and famously uncompromising. Blunt, angry, demanding, argumentative and completely lacking in small talk. A bull-headed, mule-footed gadfly. Uncomfortable.
Those are his good traits.

Not to mention ruthlessly honest. Curious. Eloquent. Principled. Patient beyond reason or endurance. Brave. And possessed of that rare combination of generosity and great-heartedness which is grace.

I would not want to lose his trust.